[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bug-gnu-libiconv] Solaris libiconv vs. GNU libiconv in terms of 646

From: Dagobert Michelsen
Subject: Re: [bug-gnu-libiconv] Solaris libiconv vs. GNU libiconv in terms of 646
Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 21:26:30 +0200

Hi Bruno,

Am 03.04.2008 um 20:19 schrieb Bruno Haible:
Dagobert Michelsen wrote:
It looks like Solaris uses 646 as standard which is
known to Solaris libiconv but not GNU libiconv.

This situation has been addressed in full generality - there is not only Solaris and "646", there is also HP-UX and "hp15CN", and many others -
in the gnulib module 'iconv_open', here:

As I understand it there should be an encodings_solaris.def similar
to the files for osf1 and aix with the mappings from charset.alias
or am I getting something completely wrong here?

If you try to make all software understand the nonstandard encoding names that Solaris uses, then you have a lot to do. It's ranging from libiconv (where modifying the encodings*.def files would be the way to go, as you say) over
mutt up to X11.

I see. But why has this work been done for aix and osf1 then?
Do they have a less difficult set of mappings than solaris?

It is more promising and less work to make all software support and use the
*standard* encoding names.

From a point of portability of the softwares it would.
However, patching dozens of softwares seems more work to
me than providing an encoding_solaris.def. Would you
accept a patch providing the solaris encodings?

Best regards

  -- Dago

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]